Saturdays Washington Post gave prominent placement to an article headlined Influential Republicans working to draft Jeb Bush into 2016 presidential race that detailed the establishment GOPs desperate attempt to recruit the former Governor of Florida to run for president.

The article by Philip Rucker and Robert Costa claims that Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christies political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOPs brightest hope to win back the White House.

Rucker and Costa then proceed to list exactly zero conservative leaders who are actively recruiting Bush to run for President.

They did, however, provide a long list of progressive Republican billionaires and establishment Republican supporters of Mitt Romney, and his disastrous failure in the 2012 presidential campaign, whose views of Jeb Bush were well stated by former Secretary of State and progressive Republican foreign policy guru Henry Kissinger: He is someone who is experienced, moderate and thoughtful.

The Washington Post writers then gave some examples of Bushs recent political activity (remember he left office in 2006) that should give real pause to any conservative activist or Tea Party movement supporter who might be thinking that Bush wouldnt be too bad.

Bush campaigned for Obamas go-to Republican Senator, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, against State Rep. Joe Carr, the consensus Senate candidate of the state's Tea Party and limited government constitutional conservatives.

Last spring, Bush hosted a dozen high-profile conservatives, including writers for the Wall Street Journals editorial page, at a dinner at Washingtons Willard InterContinental Hotel, where he defended Common Core.

During the fight to defund Obamacare Bush called Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire to commend her for opposing the conservatives whose fight to cut spending and defund Obamacare led to the federal government shutdown.

In other words, openly opposing the views of the grassroots conservative activist base of the Republican Party is what Rucker and Costa call small steps to assert his conservative bona fides.

Some may be inclined to chalk-up The Washington Post article as another example of the media not knowing anything about conservatives and the conservative movement and thus making the erroneous assumption that all Republicans, including Jeb Bush, are conservative.

But we dont see it that way.

What we see is a steady and well-orchestrated effort to redefine conservatism to the left, and thus marginalize as radical or unelectable any candidate or elected official who subscribes to limited government constitutional conservative principles.

This can only help establishment Republican candidates like Chris Christie and Jeb Bush assert their conservative bona fides.

The Washington Post article was also really quite revealing in defining the civil war in the Republican Party by who it did and didnt quote.

On one side were the quote-ees; the establishment Republican players, billionaire Romney bundlers, former ambassadors appointed by Jeb Bushs father and brother and the prospective ambassadors to be appointed by Jeb if he gains the presidency.

On the other side were the not-quoted; the TEA Party activists, conservative movement leaders, limited government advocates and opponents of the surveillance state  including a good chunk of Silicon Valley  who have already seen what two Bush presidencies look like and want no part of another.

As CHQ Chairman Richard A. Viguerie observed in his new book TAKEOVER, due out on April 8, No matter who else gets in the Republican presidential primaries, Jeb Bush will remain the great white hope of the Republican establishment. In addition to supporting all of their major policy goals from Common Core to amnesty for illegal aliens, a Bush candidacy also holds out the hope of millions of dollars in consulting business and lucrative lobbying contracts for a small but powerful coterie of Bush family supporters and acolytes.

No one else in America, save Hillary Clinton, starts the 2016 political season with a larger Rolodex of Washington insider supporters than does Jeb Bush. A Jeb Bush election as president would ensure that the Republican establishment stays in power for at least another decade, and it would also ensure that, no matter if Jeb or the Democrat wins, Big Government will prevail.

Click the link to read Influential Republicans working to draft Jeb Bush into 2016 presidential race by Philip Rucker and Robert Costa from Saturdays Washington Post.

1. Bush -- like it or not, Americans in general and conservatives in particular don't like any hints of dynasties. This third Bush will clearly overshadow a second Clinton.

2. Terri Schiavo - Today is anniversary of Terri Schiavo's death. Her death is part of Jeb Bush's record. There couldn't be a more telling time (day) for Jeb Bush's aspirations for the presidency to be put in front of America.

3. Amnesty. Like his brother before him, and like all the Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush is pro-amnesty for illegals. Little more than a week ago, Jeb Bush was quoted as saying, "Jeb Bush: "People who come here legally and illegally are the risk takers....""

These are only the top 3 that tell me Jeb Bush is a non-starter.

His name now smacks of royalty, pro-lifers are rightly suspicious of him, and conservatives as a group do not support illegal amnesty.

1. Bush — like it or not, Americans in general and conservatives in particular don’t like any hints of dynasties. This third Bush will clearly overshadow a second Clinton.

2. Terri Schiavo - Today is anniversary of Terri Schiavo’s death. Her death is part of Jeb Bush’s record. There couldn’t be a more telling time (day) for Jeb Bush’s aspirations for the presidency to be put in front of America.

3. Amnesty. Like his brother before him, and like all the Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush is pro-amnesty for illegals. Little more than a week ago, Jeb Bush was quoted as saying, “Jeb Bush: “People who come here legally and illegally are the risk takers....””

These are only the top 3 that tell me Jeb Bush is a non-starter.

His name now smacks of royalty, pro-lifers are rightly suspicious of him, and conservatives as a group do not support illegal amnesty.

2
posted on 03/31/2014 7:49:05 AM PDT
by xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)

Bush is a joke. However, I think he is the GOP front runner as he will have the backing and we have just as many low info voters as the Dims. We also have no conservative leaders atm. Oh we have some prominent conservatives, just no leaders.

And if they are successful in nominating Jebby, I wonder if we’ll even carry Utah. You can also bet on losing the House and the Dims getting 60+ in the Senate especially if Hildabeast runs.

2014 is pretty meaningless. It’s 2016 that is huge. And what is the GOPs answer to that? A war on Conservatives.

Jeb also pats himself on the back and claims he did great things in Florida’s public education system. While Florida’s graduation rates are climbing (barely) it remains in the bottom 10% when compared to other states.

11
posted on 03/31/2014 7:57:17 AM PDT
by Thermalseeker
(If ignorance is bliss how come there aren't more happy people?)

During the fight to defund Obamacare Bush called Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire to commend her for opposing the conservatives whose fight to cut spending and defund Obamacare led to the federal government shutdown.

Of course, the refusal of Baraq Obama and Harry Reid to consider a duly passed budget by the Constitutionally-mandated House of Congress responsible for providing one was what REALLY led to the shutdown. Again, The Lie, repeated.

Amnesty. Like his brother before him, and like all the Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush is pro-amnesty for illegals. Little more than a week ago, Jeb Bush was quoted as saying, "Jeb Bush: "People who come here legally and illegally are the risk takers....""

Amnesty, specifically the GOP's and W's support of it, is what lost the GOP control of congress in 2006. That IMHO was really the nail in the coffin of the Bush administration.

These establishment Republicans never learn from history.

Our problem (myself included)is we think of Reagan as the rule rather than the exception. The Reagan presidency was fought tooth and nail by the establishment, many of whom are still in power today. Reagan had the same up hill battle that Ted Cruz will have getting the nomination, then getting his agenda through a GOP controlled congress.

1. Bush — like it or not, Americans in general and conservatives in particular don't like any hints of dynasties. This third Bush will clearly overshadow a second Clinton.

I think they are showing their hand. Bush will help Hillary because she can hide behind the fact that “his dynasty is worse than mine” JUST like romneycare and obamacare. Rinos don't care who's in power as long as they're liberal; democrat or republican.

18
posted on 03/31/2014 8:10:52 AM PDT
by Linda Frances
(Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.)

Just another who wants to satisfy Wall Street and money holders when he should be seeking the support of Main Street. Maybe they think that not coming across as a flaming weirdo senator would be enough to win.

...and thus marginalize as radical or unelectable any candidate or elected official who subscribes to limited government constitutional conservative principles is to the right of Mao Zedong.

I forget who which FReeper wrote it but basically he said the mission of the Bush-Clinton Crime Family is to prevent the rise of another Reagan. He's right but I would add any other non-Establishment butt kisser candidate.

22
posted on 03/31/2014 8:13:45 AM PDT
by Count of Monte Fisto
(The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)

Being part of the Bush machine—and a smug part of it at that—is up there too. Then there’s his insufferable poor-mouthing about how he’s had to go make money after receiving such a pittance in compensation during his governorship.

Conservatives need rally around 1 or 2 candidates tops before the primaries or well be stuck with another retread.

Bullseye. That should be its own thread on FR every day for the next 3 years.

The problem is, however, wading through the dozen or so pseudo-conservatives who will be throwing their hats into the rink and claiming they are THE conservative. Several of the 2008/2012 retreads are already hinting at making another run.

Because of the need for state organizations and major backing, serious contenders need to already be organizing.

The news of Rand Paul already managing to have organizations in all 50 states should be an example for all candidates. Of course, Paul gets much of that benefit from his daddy's organization, since Daddy was a perpetual presidential contender.

A potential, serious candidate has to raise so much money any more. This next presidential election will likely cost over a $billion dollars. Both parties will likely spends $hundreds of millions to select and field their respective nominees. Presidential politics requires big-money.

"Bush -- like it or not, Americans in general and conservatives in particular don't like any hints of dynasties." Sadly, I am not sure that this is true. In the recent Texas Republican Primary, George P. Bush, son of Jeb Bush, received 75% of the vote for Land Commissioner. He has no qualifications for the office and is using this only as an opportunity to enter politics without starting at the bottom. His opponent, David Watts was extraordinarily qualified for the office and is a core conservative. Low information Republican voters in Texas pulled the lever because the candidate was a Bush. There was no other reason to vote for him.

31
posted on 03/31/2014 8:36:49 AM PDT
by JeepersFreepers
(The heart of the wise inclines to the right but the heart of the fool to the left. (Eccl 10:2 NIV))

Because conservatives are little different than liberals. Too lazy and ignorant to do anything that really matters. If we can't get a thousand people out to state conventions to start changing things at the most basic level, we aren't going to elect a president. Period.

38
posted on 03/31/2014 8:46:50 AM PDT
by cripplecreek
(REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)

His opponent, David Watts was extraordinarily qualified for the office and is a core conservative. Low information Republican voters in Texas pulled the lever because the candidate was a Bush. There was no other reason to vote for him.

I voted for Watts, but I never saw a sign or an ad campaigning for him as Land Commissioner! If you don't tell people who you are and what you stand for, you don't stand a chance; and of course you are going to lose!

43
posted on 03/31/2014 9:07:22 AM PDT
by TexanByBirth
(Free Republic: where they may agree with the message, but they love to shoot the messenger!)

Conservatives need their own conventions before the GOP ones to decide on conservative candidates

I’ve been saying this. If we don’t rally around one or two our vote will be diluted. The tea party needs to help with this. True tea party not the hollywood version. Wish we could have a fair and true conservative primary before the primary. Cpac was deluged with Paul voters.

44
posted on 03/31/2014 9:10:51 AM PDT
by Linda Frances
(Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.)

If JEB is such a brilliant "conservative," why has his son moved to Texas to run for office. Wouldn't one expect him to want to stay in Florida, where he might benefit from his father's "competent" state-craft?

Just joking. They both display a lack of consistent dedication to anything that most of us would want to be a party to.

This one certainly wont-he is still part of the GOP establishment-and the words political and dynasty do not belong in the same sentence, ever...

Good deal. The GOPe is as bad as democrats.

And my point was that his supporters parade his wife as some sort of token Latino. They’re assuming that Latinos would be attracted to him because his wife is Latino. I don’t care if his wife is Chinese, Black, Italian, Latino, etc. I care about where he stands on the issues.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.